Part III: Comparative Description

NOTES:This section examines the sentencing parameters point values, as follows:

The Criminal Punishment Code allows for a non-state prison sanction for offenders
scoring 44.0 or less total points.

The Code mandates state prison as the sanction, unless the sentence is mitigated, for all those offenders whose total points exceed 44.0.

This means that only those offenders scoring 44 or less points may receive a non
state prison sanction under the Code. All others must receive a state prison
sanction, absent downward departure from this structure.

In addition, on January 24, 2002 the Supreme Court of Florida ruled in Jones v.
State that Section 948.01(3) F.S. (supp. 1998), which allows for the sanction of
drug offender probation in the case of a chronic substance abuser, provides an
alternative sentencing scheme for drug offenders that is outside the Code. It was
ruled that the trial court had the discretion to sentence the defendant to drug
offender probation even though the Code mandated prison time.

Actual sanctions imposed, including state prison, community control, probation,
county jail/time served, and other sanctions are presented and compared to the
categories listed above.

FINDINGS:

Across the state, 17.5% of offenders were sentenced to state prison as the most
severe sanction in FY2005-2006. An additional 27.4% were sentenced to
incarceration in county jail, or to time already served in jail. Nearly five percent
(4.8%) were sentenced to community control, and nearly half to probation
(48.9%), including drug offender probation, administrative probation, and
regular probation. A little over one percent (1.4%) of offenders were sentenced
to "other" sanctions. For sentencing dates in FY2004-2005, 17.2% of offenders
were sentenced to state prison and 27.4% were sentenced to county jail or time
served. Less than six percent (5.7%) were sentenced to community control, and
48.3% to probation. Only 1.4% of the offenders were sentenced to "other"
sanctions (Table 1).

More than three-quarters of the 93,946 Code scoresheets with sentence date in
FY2005-2006 examined (73,823 scoresheets or 78.69%) scored 44 points or
less (Table 1). These scoresheets represent sentencing events where the judge
has the discretion to sentence the offender to either a non-state prison sanction
or a state prison sanction. If the judge chose to sentence the offender to state
prison, the judge had the discretion to sentence the offender up to the statutory
maximum of the law. For scoresheets with sentence dates in FY2004-2005,
there were 66,920 (77.9%) offenders scoring 44 points or less (Table 1).

For FY2005-2006, of the offenders scoring in the recommended state prison
category, 55.2% were sentenced to state prison, with another 14.5% sentenced
to county jail or time served. Of those scoring less than 44 points, 7.2% were
sentenced to state prison, and 30.9% to county jail/time served. For FY2004-
2005, a little over fifty-three percent (53.5%) of the offenders scoring above 44
points were sentenced to state prison and another 14.8% of these offenders were
sentenced to county jail or time served. Of those scoring less than 44 points,
6.9% were sentenced to state prison, and 31.0% to county jail/time served (Table 1).

Scoresheets with a state prison sanction increased slightly from 17.2% in
FY2004-2005 to 17.5% in FY2005-2006. County jail sanctions remained
relatively constant at 27.4% in between FY2004-2005 and FY2005-2006.
Community supervision sanctions decreased from 5.7% in FY2004-2005 to
4.8% in FY2005-2006 (Table 1).

Statewide, 67.5% of offenders receiving a prison sanction scored out to a prison
sanction. Table 2 presents the scoring distribution of offenders under the Code
for FY2004-2005 and FY2005-2006 by circuit and sanction imposed. In
FY2005-2006, Circuit 11 (Miami) had the highest percentage (89.8%) of prison
sanctioned scoresheets with more than 44 points while Circuit 19 (Ft. Pierce)
has the lowest (44.8%).

Incarceration rates vary greatly by county and circuit. Jail sanctions also vary
greatly depending on the number of beds available and judicial inclination to
use the jail sanction. Table 3 presents the distribution of sanction imposed by
circuit and county. Although variance in sentencing does exist at the circuit and
county level based on the judge involved, variability in the statistics presented
in this table could also be as a result of differences in the type of offenders
being sentenced around the state. There are also very small numbers of scoresheets for some of the counties listed in this table. The incarceration rates
for counties with less than 100 scoresheets could possibly be misleading (Table 3).

In both FY2004-2005 and FY2005-06 the majority of violent offenders
received a state prison sanction (Table 4).

The percentage of burglary offenders receiving a state prison sanction increased
slightly from FY2004-2005 to FY2005-2006 (Table 4).

The percentage of drug offenders receiving a state prison sanction increased
slightly from FY2004-2005 to FY2005-2006 (Table 4).

As would be expected, scoresheets with the highest offense severity levels
received a state prison sanction, those with the lowest received probation and
community control fell in the middle with the majority having levels 3 through
6 (Table 5).

Consistently in FY2004-2005 and FY2005-2006, for offenders sentenced to
state prison, the majority with offense severity levels of 1 through 5 received
less than two years and those with offense level 10 received more than ten years (Table 6).

From FY2004-2005 to FY2005-2006 the percentage of scoresheets with no
prior record decreased, with prior misdemeanors increased, and with four or
more felonies increased (Table 7).

From FY2004-2005 to FY2005-2006 the percentage of scoresheets with no
additional offenses decreased and those with misdemeanors increased. The
percentage with four or more felonies remained relatively constant (Table 8).

Within the Code policy, a true mitigation occurs when an offenders scores more
than 44 total points and either receives a non-state prison sanction (except drug
offender probation) or a state prison sentence length below the 25% permissible
discretion. Sanction mitigation occurs when an offender scores more than 44
total points, but receives a non-state prison sanction (except drug offender
probation).

The true mitigation rate for offenders that scored more than 44 total points is
59.8% for FY2004-2005 and 58.6% for FY2005-2006. The sanction mitigation
rate (cases that scored to state prison but received a non-state prison sanction)
was 45.3% for FY2004-2005 and 43.4% for FY2005-2006 (Table 11).

For the offenders that received a mitigated prison sentence length, the average
reduction in sentence was 22.4 months during FY2004-2005 and 22.7 months
during FY2005-2006 (Table 11).

Departure, as defined here, is not a comment on the legality of the sentence.
There are many reasons for departure, which are recognized as legitimate under
F. S. 921.0026. In addition, other Statutes, such as F. S. 948.034, establish
special conditions allowing for departures from recommended sentences.
Database limitations do not allow us to isolate all these reasons for departure.

Table 1
Recommended Sanction Category by Sanction Imposed

Sanction Imposed

Recommended Sanction Category

FY 2004-2005
Sentence Dates1

FY 2005-2006Sentence Dates2

44.0 Points or fewer

More than 44.0 Points

Total

44.0 Points or fewer

More than 44.0 Points

Total

State Prison

4,635

10,170

14,805

5,345

11,115

16,460

6.90%

53.50%

17.20%

7.20%

55.20%

17.50%

Community Control

3,600

1,295

4,895

3,343

1,163

4,506

5.40%

6.80%

5.70%

4.50%

5.80%

4.80%

Probation

36,930

4,552

41,482

41,203

4,751

45,954

55.20%

23.90%

48.30%

55.80%

23.60%

48.90%

County Jail

20,717

2,815

23,532

22,786

2,921

25,707

31.00%

14.80%

27.40%

30.90%

14.50%

27.40%

Other

1,038

182

1,220

1,146

173

1,319

1.60%

1.00%

1.40%

1.60%

0.90%

1.40%

Total

66,920

19,014

85,934

73,823

20,123

93,946

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

*Total points greater than 44.1 Offense dates on or after October 1, 2003.2 Offense dates on or after October 1, 2004.

Figure 1
Sanction Imposed for Offenders Scoring in the
State Prison Sanction Category*